The Third Precept (Sexual Misconduct)

[Rachel Green]

Let's discuss this precept - I hear it spoken about far less than the other ones.

In today's society which is far less sexually repressive than previously, this can be complicated, can't it? What is and is not sexual misconduct?

How do we deal with lust - a problem that Ajahn Chah talks about having a lot when he was a junior monk.

What of sexual fantasies?

[Ciprian Salagean]

Not cheating you partner it is not too hard for most of the people. But this precept can go much deeper then this. We can restrain ourselves from interacting with other potential sexual partners, not to look up certain aspects that will arouse lust in ourselves, restrain form fantasies, and so on..
I recently finished a relationship and I am trying to experiment more with the potential of the celibate life. I found out that there is some kind of connections between watching TV, overeating, and the amount of lust that I have to face. Since I gave away my TV, the chances to overeat are lesser, and lust seldom bothers me. When I am at work I try to avoid interacting with young women, and if I have to, I always keep my eyes of their face and sometimes I try to be aware of what I really see (hear of the head, skin, teeth.. ).
In my moments of mindfulness I find lust to be an unpleasant kind of emotion, not to speak about all the troubles that are connected with blindly following our lusts.

[Michael Sinclair]

I have learnt a good anecdote for when I see an attractive person who gives rise to innapropriate thoughts. I visualise that person as the Buddha which in turn transforms my desirous thoughts into thoughts of love and compassion.

So far it seams to work.

[Bhante Nandiya]

The third precept itself is incredibly vague. One wonders if this is intentionally as to cover a wide range of activities, or if it's to avoid mentioning the sexual act explicitly but that's what you're meant to understand - it seems to me, that either is possible.
The way I usually define the third precept, is to refrain from having sex with someone whom you're not in a committed relationship with. But that's entirely my own reasoning.

In one sutta, where the Buddha compared the practice of brahmins unfavorably with that of dogs, one of the practices was (this is just from my memory) "The Brahmins of old, engaged in intercourse with Brahmin women only for the sake of procreation, not for the sake of pleasure. This too is a practice which used to be found amongst Brahmins, but is now only found amongst dogs"

This points to another possible interpretation of the third precept, that it's actually a precept against sexual intercourse for pleasure.

My best advice for overcoming sexual lust, is to be attached to celibacy, to actually love being celibate. Then you wont have any problems at all! And I love being celibate and speaking in praise of celibacy, because it massively simplifies relationships.

[Bo Schafers]

The third precept itself is incredibly vague.

I agree with you Blake...

I have a sense (not the traditional Theravadan view) that for lay persons 'sexual misconduct' relates to refraining from anything hurtful and abusive rather than total abstinence/forced dispassion. The latter would not be practical for most people. Repression can breed some very undesirable conditions i.e. the Catholic Church, Muslim and other fundamentalism...

I guess a sane form of celibacy as you suggest is a solution, but it borders on acetic practice for many.

Finally I hope we can muster compassion for and insight into our own sexuality, and that of others (as opposed to denial). These surely are the first steps towards transcendence and liberation.

[Michael Rodgers]

The third precept itself is incredibly vague.

Is that actually so? I recall a list in the suttas of what constitutes sexual misconduct. In particular sex with women/girls (and presumably men/boys) under the guardianship of a parent and those who are married or betrothed. There may be more to that list.

i do not think this precept is about sense restraint, which is taught separately and generally after the precepts have been mastered. I always thought the key point of this precept was to avoid sexual relationships that would have a high chance of leading to conflict and suffering. I would, for example, include sex between bosses and employees, or teachers and students in this category.

Interestingly this precept is sometimes translated as misconduct in any sensual pleasure not just sex. However, while restraint in all areas of sensuality is good, I do not think this was the intended meaning of this precept.

[Bhante Nandiya]

Interestingly this precept is sometimes translated as misconduct in any sensual pleasure not just sex. However, while restraint in all areas of sensuality is good, I do not think this was the intended meaning of this precept.

That however, IS the literal translation of the pali. The pali for the 3rd precept is:
Kāmesu micchācāra

Kāmesu is the locative plural of Kāma, in it's plural form it means "the senses" or perhaps "sense pleasures", in singular it can mean "desire", but this is plural. Locative case (the esu) simply means that it is the domain (location) of the action, translatable using "in, on, around, with regard to".

Miccha is the opposite of samma, in the eightfold path, right view is sammaditthi, wrong view is micchaditthi. So miccha is usually translated as "wrong" but just as "right" is an inadequate translation for "samma" (which carries tones of wholeness, completeness, perfection), "wrong" is probably an inadequate translation for miccha.
cara is "walking" or "going about", for example, gocara, a "field", is the cow-wandering place while brahmacara is translated "the holy life". So micchācāra can be translated as "wrong conduct".

This means the whole plai expression can be translated literally as "wrong conduct in the senses".

[Michael Rodgers]

Thanks Blake. Do you think the literal meaning is the intended one? For example is it meant to cover eating, or socialising, or listening to music? Again those things are covered in other teachings.

Is the word Kama used just for sex in other contexts? We all know of the Kama sutra although that is Sanskrit I believe. The other context I am familiar with is the Jhanic formula when it is used in the withdrawal from the senses ( or sense pleasures according to some).

[Rachel Green]

... for lay persons 'sexual misconduct' relates to refraining from anything hurtful and abusive rather than total abstinence/forced dispassion. The latter would not be practical for most people.

Finally I hope we can muster compassion for and insight into our own sexuality, and that of others (as opposed to denial). These surely are the first steps towards transcendence and liberation.

This is my understanding too Bo, that it concerns not being involved in a sexual act that would hurt others, such as having sex with someone who was in a relationship with someone else.
I do not see that it is suggesting celibacy. It is talking about inappropriate sexual activity not no activity in a loving relationship.

[Rachel Green]

When I am at work I try to avoid interacting with young women, and if I have to, I always keep my eyes off their face ...

When I trained as a Feldenkrais practitioner we spent a lot of time learning to differentiate between different forms of touch and the intent behind our touch. Thus I learnt to become aware when there was any sexual intent behind touch, when my touch was simply loving and when it was neutral or informative.

I think the same can apply to any form of communication including eye contact. It is the intent behind the looking or eye contact maybe that you could monitor rather than avoiding it altogether, as in Australian (Anglo) culture at least that would be taken as rude.

It is possible to look simply to connect with/acknowledge/engage with another human, or to look to indicate you are listening with interest, or to look with the intention to flirt, or to look seductively or with sexual desire, for example. Becoming very clear on our intention and communicating that clearly is important here I think.

[Ciprian Salagean]

It is the intent behind the looking or eye contact maybe that you could monitor rather than avoiding it altogether, as in Australian (Anglo) culture at least that would be taken as rude.

I wanted to say that "I always try to keep my eyes on their face (and keep off from other parts that might arise lust). I am sorry about the mistake.
I think as a training instrument, each of the precepts can be used for exercising restraint, not only to avoid unwanted consequences. Like not eating after noon during Uposatha days. I is not immoral to have dinner, but is a good exercise to abstain from time to time...

(I apologize for my frequent mistakes in using English. In a previous post, for example, after using the auto-correction function of my browser "significantly" came out as "scientifically")

[Simon van Veen]

Today this precept was the main point of focus in a sangha I visited. I contemplated a bit about it and wanted to share my thoughts over here.

This precept is maybe very vague. But as all stones in the 8-fold path, it is a continuous development, so where you draw the line can be different for everybody and can change depending on time and situation. The sangha I visited is in the tradition of Thich Nhat Hahn and he reformulated it as "True love". I think he has a point there; if sex is done out of true love, it's ok, otherwise it might hurt you or others. For example: People in a relationship don't have sex outside of it out of true love for their partners, monks don't have sex at all out of true love for themselves.

About lust, One of my friends once said "Sex is overrated". He still doesn't know how much he learned me by saying that. Because it's true. Sex isn't that fantastic or important at all. (let me make this joke myself before anybody else does: Yeah, maybe I'm just bad in bed ) Anyway, still it is always a main thing in movies, advertising, guys talk, nightlife etc, so that's kind of confusing.

But I think I figured out why. When people have sex, they tend to be in the moment for just a while. And afterwards everything seems to fall into place. (that's probably why men fall asleep. ) Most people aren't used to that calm mind, so they might think they can only achieve these states through sex. But as Buddhists know we can also get these states through meditation. So that should make us less dependent on sex. Especially outside of a loving relationship sex is very empty, I think.

Since I realised this my lust is much, much less than before. And it already diminished a lot through meditation before I had this theory. Also as Ciprian said, being single and throwing away the tele simplifies live a lot. But I, being a 24-year old guy, offcourse have had troubles with it and probably still will so it's good to have this thread. I don't see myself violating the precept however, because I never was and never will be interested in sex outside of a relationship. It's just not worth the trouble. (or the money hehehehehe )

[Simon van Veen]

This also came to mind:

I believe Ajahn Brahmavamso once said in a talk that you can tackle lust by focussing on small imperfections in the person you feel lust towards. Like focussing on a freckle or an angled tooth or birthmark or whatever. I did it multiple times and it is a good training to see how easily the mind and body develop lust and how easy it is to eradicate it. (you have to be mindful at that moment, that's the key problem here hehe )

Though it works wonderfully and can be a good tip for some (that's why I share it), I personally feel like it's not really handling the 'problem' at its root. Symptom fighting we call it in Holland. Does anybody know the English term? I think having good meditation works better.

[Martin Cross]

My understanding the precept for lay people is to not have sex with people who are attached,could be hurtful and abusive etc.Once you became a monastic/anagarika the precept became celibacy for practical reasons and sense restraint.
Most people as far as I am aware dont have much problem with the physical aspect,the mental aspect may be a different story.Most precepts seem to finer levels of commitment.But then the path is a gradual one and takes years if not lifetimes to complete.

[Jerrod Lopes]

I've begun to see a pattern here with all of the precepts. Not a pattern in them, but a pattern in living them and understanding them. It occurs to me that the answers are all inside. Maybe this is part of the fundamental buddha-nature. I for one am sure it is. It's the 'gut' feeling or instinctual response when questioning oneself about the right and wrong aspects of a subject. Deep down, deeper for some than others, the answers are all there. If you have even a slight inkling that what you are doing or thinking about doing is wrong, harmful or not beneficial, then it is.

Sexual misconduct is one of the easiest to tackle of the five precepts, in my opinion. Most of the reasons have already been discussed. Some remedies for the arousal of lust have also been discussed.

I find that in learning to look at people as people instead of objects helps immensely. I think I used to look at women/girls as objects to acquire. It was exciting for me to get a woman's interest. That was enough. The thrill of the chase, as it were. This is also a very good reason for me not to violate the 5th precept as well, because when I drank, I thought I was Don Juan De Marco (or some other such nefarious lover-boy type). So looking at people, in my case women, as objects to be acquired led me to the realization that lust is a sub-category of greed. If one can stem greed for wanting physical possessions, it is then easier to conquer lust. I also find that there is often an emotional/mental deficiency involved that goes very deep. To crave sex and or being able to find someone willing to participate is a longing for something other than sex. It is a wanting to be accepted, to be wanted in return, which is then a desire to have worth. In most cases involving people I've known and been able to observe, this is consistent with other outward signs of a sense of low self-worth. These same people tend to want or own fancy cars, clothes and other items to get attention for themselves in hopes of creating envy in the people they are trying to impress.

This may seem off-track regarding the topic of this precept, yet it is relevant. It is laying bare the root causes of lust, which I found for most of my life, very difficult to control. Difficult to control because it is something one really wants to do and is driven to do, sometimes more than eating or sleeping.

So I may take back what I said about it being easy to follow this precept because it's roots are so amazingly deep-seated in the mind that one will benefit greatly from a practice with a firm and steady foundation before trying to tackle this alone. In the end, however, I see that the activities that are refrained from in all 5 precepts have many many commonalities. it seems that whether one drinks and uses drugs, or lies to gain some benefit, or is sexually promiscuous, or steals and covets objects; these all aim to fill a perceived void in one's thoughts and heart. Many times it is this low self-worth. Not realizing that self-worth is an unnecessary device.

I found in the past that the Buddha's advice, straight and unaltered helped me greatly in the eradication of the mental addiction involving looking at the female form. That is to contemplate the stuff beneath the surface: bones, blood, urine, excrement, etc... in understanding that these women are people too, just like me. Knowing and being mindful that these women share these physical components reminds me that they too have minds, hearts, thoughts and feelings, again, like me. I would not, and have not liked to have been looked at like an object. So why would a woman enjoy me looking at her in that way? It is so much more fun to now know women as friends and equals. It opened the field wide to find new friends and learn about all manner of things when not distracted by less-than-pure mental formations.

Lastly, I realize that lust for sex is much like any other addiction. They all have common components. And like Simon says, "sex is overrated". In the end, it's not the be all end all of experiences. I've often said that I've had meditations far better than any sexual experience... and that's saying quite a bit. I still enjoy sex with my GF, but only her. I have little to no desire to look at other women in that way anymore. I'm trying to teach her the same thing about her liking to look at other men. In the end, it's a waste of time. It all begins, and ends, with the mind.

Jerrod : )